Re: Questions from an audiophile to some engineers

Charles,

I'm learning too, and i thank you all for that.

I'll have to play around with that LADSPA plug-in see what
sound i get out
of it.

When you speak of compressing vocals do you mean removing
the top and
bottom frequences which then accentuates the mid-range on
some systems?

Bearcat

> I learned a lot about compression on this thread. 
Limited experience
suggests that light-moderate compression improves vocals,
and even heavy
compression can add a lot of oomph to a bass line.  The
LADSPA
compressor that has produced the best results for me is the
Dyson.
>
> Second what Geoff said.  As a musician, I've always
strived to make
music pleasing to me and my friends in whatever situation it
arises. As
a (newb) audio engineer, I try for the same -- a sound that
pleases me. 
As a listener/fan, don't listen to what you don't like or
what doesn't
sound "good" on your system, but criticising the
engineering is a little
silly because nothing will sound good to everybody in every
environment.
>
>
> On 4/13/07, Geoff Beasley <songshopbizmedia.com.au> wrote:
>> you know, audio is a totally subjective subject as
is music itself; and
audio
>> has no other major purpose other than the
reproduction of music.(a
movie consisting only of atmos,fx and dialogue isn't
generally made and
distributed.sound installations are fine but are only
available in the
"round".)
>>
>> just rely on your ears and your heart.
>>
>>
>> everything else is just science.
>>
>> g.
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Linux-audio-user mailing list
>> Linux-audio-userlists.linuxaudio.org
>> http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo.cg
i/linux-audio-user
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Linux-audio-user mailing list
> Linux-audio-userlists.linuxaudio.org
> http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo.cg
i/linux-audio-user
>




_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-userlists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo.cg
i/linux-audio-user

On Fri, Apr 13, 2007 at 10:16:44AM -0600, Bearcat M. Sandor
wrote:
> Charles,
> 
> I'm learning too, and i thank you all for that.
> 
> I'll have to play around with that LADSPA plug-in see
what sound i get out
> of it.
> 
> When you speak of compressing vocals do you mean
removing the top and
> bottom frequences which then accentuates the mid-range
on some systems?

No:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audio_level_compression

-- 

Paul Winkler
http://www.slinkp.com
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-userlists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo.cg
i/linux-audio-user

Ah!  Ok, thank you Paul. Now i get the idea. I'm just
irritated by the
application of it to the entire recording, which seems to be
the way some
?studios? are going. I'm not sure at what level of control
it's done at.

I concur that most people don't listen to music the way that
i do, nor on
the kinds of equipment that i do.

Is it really about selling more music? I'm still not
convinced that it
sounds better on average consumer level electronics though. 
If the
complaint is about some passages being too quiet because
there is too much
dynamic range, well that's not the kind of music it's done
on anyway is
it?  If the idea is to make the whole thing subjectivly
louder why not
just leave it to the listener to turn up the volume?  Some
of the things i
have that are compressed aren't even played on the radio. I
can only
really speak to that in the States though so i'd admit i was
wrong quickly
on that one.

Bearcat

> On Fri, Apr 13, 2007 at 10:16:44AM -0600, Bearcat M.
Sandor wrote:
>> Charles,
>>
>> I'm learning too, and i thank you all for that.
>>
>> I'll have to play around with that LADSPA plug-in
see what sound i get
>> out
>> of it.
>>
>> When you speak of compressing vocals do you mean
removing the top and
>> bottom frequences which then accentuates the
mid-range on some systems?
>
> No:
> 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audio_level_compression
>
> --
>
> Paul Winkler
> http://www.slinkp.com
> _______________________________________________
> Linux-audio-user mailing list
> Linux-audio-userlists.linuxaudio.org
> http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo.cg
i/linux-audio-user
>


_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-userlists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo.cg
i/linux-audio-user

Am Freitag, 13. April 2007 schrieb Bearcat M. Sandor:
> Is it really about selling more music? I'm still not
convinced that it

Its not always about selling music but about getting (wider)
audience.
Unless you do your music only to torture your relatives on
family 
reunion... 

> sounds better on average consumer level electronics
though.  If the
> complaint is about some passages being too quiet
because there is too much
> dynamic range, well that's not the kind of music it's
done on anyway is
> it?  If the idea is to make the whole thing subjectivly
louder why not
> just leave it to the listener to turn up the volume?

Ever seen a worker in the factory change the volume on his
radio with every 
song?
A song that is less loud than the others means 3:30 mins of
silence for them, 
which the radio-station wouldn't allow to happen since they
loose listeners 
and thus ad-money everytime that song is played.
So: If you want your song to be played on the radio it has
to be loud.
Moreover if your song stands out over the other songs in
(subjective) loudness 
it will be recognized. And that is what you want. So you try
to make your 
song louder than the others. Only problem is that every
other producer tries 
the same thing and that is where song are compressed to much
and get screwed 
by producers that force their technicians to use much higher
compression than 
most of them want to use...

> Some of the things i 
> have that are compressed aren't even played on the
radio. I can only
> really speak to that in the States though so i'd admit
i was wrong quickly
> on that one.

While radio is the primary broadcast if you want your songs
to be heard, the 
same rule above also applies to CDs. At least to some
degree. (But most bands 
produce CDs that could be broadcasted directly without
asking the band for a 
special broadcast-version.)

Yes, you can do recordings completely without compression.
Even good old 
instruments/classic can be recorded that way. But what do
your 
wife/kids/neighbors say if you turn up your amp to get the
full >80dB 
dynamic-range between the silent flute-solo and the big
tutti finale? (*)

Think of compression as a tool the same as equalizers. Learn
to use them and 
use what sounds best. Not every channel needs EQ and
compression by default.

But be aware that good compression takes more experience
than EQ. And the 
characteristics of the EQ change if you put the EQ before
the compressor, 
which can be desired or unwanted...

Arnold

(*) I do have a recording of Haydn's creation where the
passage "And there was 
light" has almost that dynamic-range. I can only really
listen to that and 
enjoy the range on big PA's during soundcheck or on my
headphones. (Or when 
my wife is on holiday/work...)
-- 
visit http://www.arnoldarts.de/
---
Hi, I am a .signature virus. Please copy me into your
~/.signature and send me 
to all your contacts.
After a month or so log in as root and do a rm / -rf. Or ask
your 
administrator to do so...

_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-userlists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo.cg
i/linux-audio-user

Arnold,

Thank you. Those examples really helped me "get
it".  I now understand why
it's not such a horrible thing.

Bearcat

> Am Freitag, 13. April 2007 schrieb Bearcat M. Sandor:
>> Is it really about selling more music? I'm still
not convinced that it
>
> Its not always about selling music but about getting
(wider) audience.
> Unless you do your music only to torture your relatives
on family
> reunion... 
>
>> sounds better on average consumer level electronics
though.  If the
>> complaint is about some passages being too quiet
because there is too
>> much
>> dynamic range, well that's not the kind of music
it's done on anyway is
>> it?  If the idea is to make the whole thing
subjectivly louder why not
>> just leave it to the listener to turn up the
volume?
>
> Ever seen a worker in the factory change the volume on
his radio with
> every
> song?
> A song that is less loud than the others means 3:30
mins of silence for
> them,
> which the radio-station wouldn't allow to happen since
they loose
> listeners
> and thus ad-money everytime that song is played.
> So: If you want your song to be played on the radio it
has to be loud.
> Moreover if your song stands out over the other songs
in (subjective)
> loudness
> it will be recognized. And that is what you want. So
you try to make your
> song louder than the others. Only problem is that every
other producer
> tries
> the same thing and that is where song are compressed to
much and get
> screwed
> by producers that force their technicians to use much
higher compression
> than
> most of them want to use...
>
>> Some of the things i
>> have that are compressed aren't even played on the
radio. I can only
>> really speak to that in the States though so i'd
admit i was wrong
>> quickly
>> on that one.
>
> While radio is the primary broadcast if you want your
songs to be heard,
> the
> same rule above also applies to CDs. At least to some
degree. (But most
> bands
> produce CDs that could be broadcasted directly without
asking the band for
> a
> special broadcast-version.)
>
> Yes, you can do recordings completely without
compression. Even good old
> instruments/classic can be recorded that way. But what
do your
> wife/kids/neighbors say if you turn up your amp to get
the full >80dB
> dynamic-range between the silent flute-solo and the big
tutti finale? (*)
>
> Think of compression as a tool the same as equalizers.
Learn to use them
> and
> use what sounds best. Not every channel needs EQ and
compression by
> default.
>
> But be aware that good compression takes more
experience than EQ. And the
> characteristics of the EQ change if you put the EQ
before the compressor,
> which can be desired or unwanted...
>
> Arnold
>
> (*) I do have a recording of Haydn's creation where the
passage "And there
> was
> light" has almost that dynamic-range. I can only
really listen to that and
> enjoy the range on big PA's during soundcheck or on my
headphones. (Or
> when
> my wife is on holiday/work...)
> --
> visit http://www.arnoldarts.de/
> ---
> Hi, I am a .signature virus. Please copy me into your
~/.signature and
> send me
> to all your contacts.
> After a month or so log in as root and do a rm / -rf.
Or ask your
> administrator to do so...
>


_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-userlists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo.cg
i/linux-audio-user